Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design

[Kurfürst]

From : RL2III/1158 (microfilm)


On 31 January 1945 the combat units of the Luftwaffe and their associated Erganzungs Einheiten, had the following strength in Bf109 types.
These are on hand totals, they include both 'frontline' and 'other' units. Included are all aircraft operational and non-operational at the time.

(Combat units / Erganzungs units ):

Bf109G1/5 (0/1)
Bf109G12 (0/5)
Bf109G6 (71/328)
Bf109G14 and G14U4 (431/190)
Bf109G10, G10/U4 and G14/AS (568/3)
Bf109K4 (314/0)
Bf109G10/R6 (51/0)
Total Bf 109s (1435/527)

Other Jagd types totaled (1058/359)

Grand total (6597/1631)


NOTE : This information was originally posted by someone to correct Milo Morai, who then claimed less than 100 Bf 109s were service in 1945.

Now Milo, either compare like with the like, servicable a/c of the LW on West vs. servicable aircraft of the RAF in NW europe.. or just stuck it up and shut up.

Even you numbers, if they have any connection to real life, show 154 Bf 109s of the Reichsverteidigung, plus 452 with the Luftflotte 3. That`s 606 Bf 109s on the West, and don`t include any of the reserves.

The 2nd TAF opposing the LW on the West had 35 Squadrons of Spitfires. Even with the squadrons being taken at their full 12 plane strenght, that`s not possibly more than 420 planes. Of course because of heavy losses this was far less in reality.
(we can count RAF squadrons at their nominal 20 plane strenght, but then we should also count LW reserves which Milo`s number`s don`t include).  The USAAF employed sometimes a thousend fighter in a single sortie, and it was no rare to see many hundred LW fighters engaging these formations. The RAF could not afford that, with so few fighters available to them. No wonder why the RAF played the underdog beneath the USAAF, and it`s absolutely rare to see engagements with them in the German records;

[Furball]

31 May 1945
The strength of the Royal Air Force (RAF) stands at some 55,469 aircraft as at this date, of which 9,200 were first-line machines.

http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/milestones-of-flight/british_military/1945_3.html

[Kurfürst]

I guess 9200 is the correct number for combat types, this what Groehler also gives. 50000+ is surreal, unless everything with wings is qouted, gliders and stuff. Even the USAAF had 'just' planes 32 000 planes in service. Have no doubt about Angie will work himself up on the 50k figure.

[Angus]

Well, I guess the LW forgot to train navigation.
How else can thousands of planes miss something 100 miles long, travelling at low to medium alt at 150 miles, 3 days within a week........in DAYLIGHT ....

Oh, maybe it didn't happen except in the angieworld.....

[MiloMorai]

Now Milo, either compare like with the like, servicable a/c of the LW on West vs. servicable aircraft of the RAF in NW europe.. or just stuck it up and shut up.

Even you numbers, if they have any connection to real life, show 154 Bf 109s of the Reichsverteidigung, plus 452 with the Luftflotte 3. That`s 606 Bf 109s on the West, and don`t include any of the reserves.

Your the one Barbi that is not comparing like with like > front line a/c to front line a/c in combat units. The RAF's MU, OCU and OTU can be added in if you so desire.

What reserves? The JG Gruppes could not even equipe themselves with enough sevicable a/c to bring their numbers up to their theoretical full compliment of a/c.

we can count RAF squadrons at their nominal 20 plane strenght, but then we should also count LW reserves

Nope you can't because they were not on the books of front line units.

'Onhand' is not much use if they can't get into the air Barbi by sitting on the ground waiting for maintainance to make them servicable for combat.

Luft 3 - 452
Luft Reich - 154

front line total - 606 on hand of which only 446 were combat capable.


Proof required for your fantasy claim that I said 'less than 100 Bf 109s were service in 1945'.

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Angus
Well, I guess the LW forgot to train navigation.
How else can thousands of planes miss something 100 miles long, travelling at low to medium alt at 150 miles, 3 days within a week........in DAYLIGHT ....

Oh, maybe it didn't happen except in the angieworld.....

Oh of course it did happen Angie. Just count the crosses around arheim. Thousends of them...  As you said LW fighters turned up and shot down a number of aircraft. Most of the LW concentrated in Germany, against the USAAF bombing raids at that time. Ask the USAAF bomber crews about their experiences... they lost 241 aircraft to enemy fighters in September, compared to 150-160 in July and August.

The rest is history. Units of the W-SS and heavy tanks encircled British paratroopers (hmm, where was ULTRA, they expected 2nd line troops..), and practically wiped them out to the last men. wehrmacht soldiers with pistols, rifles and mgs were playing turkey shot at the transports freely. Where was the RAF to save them? They didn`t even have supplies! Why were they not evacuated by air?

[HoHun]

Hi Kurfürst,

>Both the Jumo 213 and DB 603 was considered for the 109 as an engine upgrade. The size of these engines was very similiar to the DB 605s, and weight was not really greater either (ca100-150kg plus). Fitting these would not cause any greater difficulty as fitting the larger Griffon to the Spitfires instead of the Merlin.

Well, I don't know how much effort went into redesigning the Spitfire for the Griffon. The RLM considered the effort to redesign the Me 109 prohibitive, but I've got to admit I haven't the full story but read only one protocol.

>In September 1944, Bf 109G Werknummer 410 528 was built with a Jumo 213 E (same as in Ta-152H), four blade porpellor, being a prototype for an unarmed, high alt photo recce.

Thanks, I hadn't been aware of that.

>So I guess fitting goodies like the 603N was indeed a possibility. Mtt would probably not proceed with those, I think, the jets were there, and in view of those "P-thousend" projects, further development of the 109 just didn`t make sense, not to say the date was 1945.

Yes, the development of the Fw 190 line made more sense at the time. It wasn't only the larger engine, but also the increased fuel load out, the armament etc. that made a larger (though heavier :-) airframe more sensible. The Ta 152 was even envisioned to take the Jumo 222, but I suspect that wouldn't have been a simple bolt-on job either :-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Your the one Barbi that is not comparing like with like > front line a/c to front line a/c in combat units. The RAF's MU, OCU and OTU can be added in if you so desire.

[/B]

I am comparing like with like, poor Milo. Frontline units, at their combat strenght. This gives 600 Bf 109s on the Western frontline against about 300 Spitfires.

What reserves? The JG Gruppes could not even equipe themselves with enough sevicable a/c to bring their numbers up to their theoretical full compliment of a/c.

[/B]

That`s BS.They had plenty of reserves, you just don`t want to count them. The LW had the reserves with the Erganzungs units, and these were stationed near the frontlines.

Even looking at Bf 109 units shows you are wrong :

I/JG 300 57/37
III/JG 300 44/38
IV/JG 300 53/39

Each of these Gruppes were expected to send 3 Staffels (Squadrons) with 12-12-12 planes into combat. That`s 36. They had 50 aircraft on hand, 37-39 servicable. Each of them were capable of doing what was expected 110-120%.

The RAF had only 1-2 operational a/c in many of it`s fighter squadrons instead of 20 in late 1944. They were far less capable of bringing their numbers up to their theoretical full compliment of a/c it seems. One would understand 1-2 aircraft missing, but 90% of the squadron?!

Nope you can't because they were not on the books of front line units.

[/B]

They were, Erganzungsgeschwaders were frontline units, and of course you play the dirty trick of not listing them.

"(Combat units / Erganzungs units ):

Bf109G1/5 (0/1)
Bf109G12 (0/5)
Bf109G6 (71/328)
Bf109G14 and G14U4 (431/190)
Bf109G10, G10/U4 and G14/AS (568/3)
Bf109K4 (314/0)
Bf109G10/R6 (51/0)
Total Bf 109s (1435/527)
Other Jagd types totaled (1058/359) "

One can see the LW held about 1/3 of it`s fighters in reserve. They could be brought up on the day the losses occured to replace them.

'Onhand' is not much use if they can't get into the air Barbi by sitting on the ground waiting for maintainance to make them servicable for combat.

[/B]

That`s why we should not count un-servicable or reserve RAF aircraft. Neither could get into the air. All servicable frontline LW fighters could.

[/B]
Luft 3 - 452
Luft Reich - 154

front line total - 606 on hand of which only 446 were combat capable.

[/B]

Yes, and that`s way more than the 2nd TAF had Spitfires.

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by HoHun

Well, I don't know how much effort went into redesigning the Spitfire for the Griffon. The RLM considered the effort to redesign the Me 109 prohibitive, but I've got to admit I haven't the full story but read only one protocol.

Hi Henning! Which protocol is that ? AFAIK, Milch kept the 109 developments "in fire", in case of the Ta152 projects fail. Ie. 109K w. the 605L was supposed to step in, provided the armament remains aduequate for 1945 (I see no reason why it wouldn`t) if problems occcur with the Tank project. I disagree though about the 605 reaching the end of it`s development, 2.3ata was planned for the 605D which would mean about 2300 HP, and from what I gathered an equivalent of the 605L (two staged 605D) was most likely put in production and saw operation. Considering the 605L`s altitude performance supprassed even the 213E`s...

>In September 1944, Bf 109G Werknummer 410 528 was built with a Jumo 213 E (same as in Ta-152H), four blade porpellor, being a prototype for an unarmed, high alt photo recce.

Thanks, I hadn't been aware of that.[/B]

Details in Radinger/Otto! There are also some DB 603 projects in that projected 109 curves PDF.

Looking on the 603L`s dimension vs 605`s, I can easily imagine it. 2.7m lenght vs. 2.3, height 1.2 vs 1050mm , 1m vs. 930 width of the 605L (even the AS/D cowling was designed to take the 605L). Though putting the 603N with all that power sounds a little pervert - it might rip itself out of the fuselage!

>So I guess fitting goodies like the 603N was indeed a possibility. Mtt would probably not proceed with those, I think, the jets were there, and in view of those "P-thousend" projects, further development of the 109 just didn`t make sense, not to say the date was 1945.

Yes, the development of the Fw 190 line made more sense at the time. It wasn't only the larger engine, but also the increased fuel load out, the armament etc. that made a larger (though heavier :-) airframe more sensible. The Ta 152 was even envisioned to take the Jumo 222, but I suspect that wouldn't have been a simple bolt-on job either :-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun) [/B]

Agree! Still I cannot imagine how would they do w/o the 109. It was a proven, cheap and easily producable airframe, with good development potential in it`s original role. More importantly, compatitive to anything the enemy had to offer. I guess there was still potential left in it, with another little facelift (Mk103m, two staged 605D, increased boost, new prop)...

Yet they would probably go for the jets, supplemented by prop-job Ta projects. Early jets couldn`t do w/o those props, that`s a fact!

[Karnak]

We're the only ones that are keeping subjects like this alive.  Nobody else is interested in pro-Spit and pro-109 posturing BS.

Just put Barbi on your ignore list and let all threads like this one die.

This is the last post I will make in this thread, and hopefully any Barbi poisoned threads hereafter.

[MiloMorai]

LOL more of Barbi's selectivety to support his superior nazi Germany agenda. And he accuses me of playing dirty tricks.

Lets look at some other 109 units, shall we.

I/JG 3 31/22
III/JG 4 13/10
I/JG 27 33/24
I/JG 27 25/20
III/JG 27 28/23
IV/JG 27 24/22
Stab/JG 77 2/1
II/JG 77 32/20
III/JG 77 10/7

So do you still want to claim that the units could be brought up to strength Barbi?

The RAF had only 1-2 operational a/c in many of it`s fighter squadrons instead of 20 in late 1944. They were far less capable of bringing their numbers up to their theoretical full compliment of a/c it seems. One would understand 1-2 aircraft missing, but 90% of the squadron?!

And Barbi says BS. Tell me Barbi how were the losses from Bodenplatte so quickly replaced? Do you have a list for RAF squadrons as has been posted for LW units?


Karnak, I don't see any pro Spit posturing BS. Only see Barbi's pro 109 posturing and anti Spit BS.

[Angus]

OOOO, September 1944 and Izzy in the pitch, Nice.
FYI, the first wave went unintercepted.
By the time of the second wave, the LW tried to intercept, but was completely screened off by allied fighters. LW losses were quite some.
By the third wave, as far as I know, the LW managed 1 intercept with some success. Most losses were to flak though.
On the second and third drop it was quite cloudy BTW.
Of course the ground fightings were quite brutal.
FYI, the Germans were actually moving their Tank units away, and if some comanders had not "tweaked" their situation status, the tanks would have been gone. But they weren't, and in 6 hrs or so the Germans were able to mount panzers and later on artillery against lightly armed paratroopers.
Still took them days to get that darned bridge back, and all other river crossings were to fall in allied hands.
Wonder how they screwed that up with thousands of Messerchmitts ready at hand...

[Crumpp]

They were, Erganzungsgeschwaders were frontline units, and of course you play the dirty trick of not listing them.

Yes they were operational training units.  However by this stage in the war very little training was conducted in them.  

The Erganzungsgeschwaders were filled with the 98% of the Luftwaffe pilots that were just pure cannon fodder.

They had an even worse ratio of pre-1943 pilots to post-1943 trained pilots than the JG's.

Crumpp

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by Kurfürst
Oh of course it did happen Angie. Just count the crosses around arheim. Thousends of them...  As you said LW fighters turned up and shot down a number of aircraft. Most of the LW concentrated in Germany, against the USAAF bombing raids at that time. Ask the USAAF bomber crews about their experiences... they lost 241 aircraft to enemy fighters in September, compared to 150-160 in July and August.

The rest is history. Units of the W-SS and heavy tanks encircled British paratroopers (hmm, where was ULTRA, they expected 2nd line troops..), and practically wiped them out to the last men. wehrmacht soldiers with pistols, rifles and mgs were playing turkey shot at the transports freely. Where was the RAF to save them? They didn`t even have supplies! Why were they not evacuated by air?

Having kept my mouth shut to this point, I am finally moved to ask:

Kurfurst....are you happy with who won the war, or do you wish it had turned out otherwise?

- oldman

[Seeker]

Originally posted by Oldman731
Having kept my mouth shut to this point, I am finally moved to ask:

Kurfurst....are you happy with who won the war, or do you wish it had turned out otherwise?

- oldman

I think a better question would be if he knows who won the war.....